Patna High Court
M/s Shiv Ram Rice Mills its Proprietor Ranjeet Kumar MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
Holding
The assessment order dated 24‑04‑2024 is annulled conditionally, with liberty to file a representation within two weeks; otherwise the order regains its force.
Summary
M/s Shiv Ram Rice Mills challenged an assessment order dated 24‑04‑2024 issued by the Assistant Commissioner of State Taxes, Samastipur, under Section 73(9) of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which imposed a tax of Rs 1,63,99,220 for FY 2018‑19. The petitioner argued that rice is an exempted item and that similar relief had been granted for FY 2020‑21 and 2021‑22, contending that the order was ex parte and should be set aside. The respondents contended that assessment proceedings are statutory and that the order could stand unless the petitioner filed a representation within two weeks. The High Court held that the ex parte order was annulled conditionally, granting the petitioner a two‑week window to file a representation, after which a reasoned order must be passed within six weeks; failure to file would revive the original order. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether an ex parte assessment order under Section 73(9) of the Bihar GST Act can be set aside without the taxpayer filing a representation.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ of mandamus restraining the tax authorities from taking coercive action.
- Whether the tax liability for FY 2018‑19 is valid in view of the exemption claim for rice.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- GST
- assessment
- ex parte order
- mandamus
- tax exemption
- writ petition
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5672 of 2025
======================================================
M/s Shiv Ram Rice Mills its Proprietor Ranjeet Kumar Mahto Son of Ram
Sagar Mahto Resident of Ward No-15 Bhuswar, P.O and P.S-Bhuswar,
District-Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Commissioner of State Taxes, New
Secretariat, Patna.
2. The Assistant Commissioner of State Taxes, Samastipur Circle, Samastipur.
3. The Additional Commissioner (Appeal) of Darbhanga Commissionery,
Darbhanga.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Alok Kumar, Adv.
Ms. Swarna Roy, Adv.
Ms. Richa Rajiv Singh, Adv.
Mr. Kamal, Adv.
Mr. Akshat Arghya, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Government Pleader (7)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH)
9 24-06-2026 The present writ petition has been filed seeking the
following reliefs:-
“1(A). For setting aside the assessment order dated
24.04.2024 & order passed under Section 73 of BGST Act
on 26.04.2024 passed by the adjudicating authority and
the appellate order dated 23.10.2024 passed by the
Respondent No. 3.
(B). For setting aside the demand as DRC-07 dated
26.04.2024.
(C). Issue a writ of mandamus directing the Respondents
to refrain from taking any coercive action against the
petitioner concerning the impugned tax liability.”
2. At the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner has
Patna High Court CWJC No.5672 of 2025(9) dt.24-06-2026
2/3
pointed out that though the claim of the petitioner has been
accepted for the financial year 2020-21 as also for the financial
year 2021-22 to the extent that rice is an exempted item and the
Respondents have consequently granted relief to the petitioner
by dropping the proceedings, however in similar circumstance
in the case of the petitioner, for the financial year 2018-19, tax
has been imposed to the tune of Rs. 1,63,99,220/- by the
impugned order dated 24.04.2024, passed by the Assistant
Commissioner, State Tax, Samastipur Circle, Samastipur under
Section 73(9) of the Central / Bihar Goods and Services Tax
Act, 2017.
3. Per contra, the learned counsel for the Respondents has
tried to justify the said Act by saying that the initiation of
assessment proceedings is a statutory and periodical exercise
required to be undertaken for each financial year independently,
hence it is possible that the petitioner might not have responded
to the show cause notice, leading to passing of the impugned
order dated 24.04.2024.
4. Nonetheless, considering the fact that the aforesaid order
dated 24.04.2024 is an ex parte order, it is submitted by the
learned counsel for the Respondents that in case the petitioner
files appropriate representation within a period of two weeks
Patna High Court CWJC No.5672 of 2025(9) dt.24-06-2026
3/3
from today with regard to the financial year 2018-19, the same
would definitely be considered in accordance with law and a
reasoned and a speaking order shall be passed within a period of
six weeks, thereafter.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case,
the aforesaid order dated 24.04.2024, passed by the Assistant
Commissioner, State Tax, Samastipur Circle, Samastipur stands
annulled, however the petitioner is granted liberty to file
appropriate representation for the financial year 2018-19 within
a period of two weeks from today, which shall be considered by
the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Samastipur Circle,
Samastipur and thereafter, he shall pass a reasoned and a
speaking order, in accordance with law, within a period of six
weeks. However, it is made clear that in case no representation
is filed within a period of two weeks from today, the aforesaid
order dated 24.04.2024 shall regain its force and would not be
amenable to any further challenge.
6. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)
( Raj Kumar, J)
Ajay/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.